The ANC’s intolerant attitude to tolerance

by The Editor

SERIES: The instantaneous and dramatic nature of current affairs lends itself to a kind of historical amnesia, one where the captivating nature of those things unfolding today, causes one to forget the bigger picture. From the Archives aims to put forward the odd reminder that, more often than not, history is merely repeating itself. In all likelihood, somewhere, someone has already experienced and commented on those all-consuming issues that appear to have materialised only yesterday. Today, a trip back to 2005 and an illustration of the ANC’s intolerant attitude to tolerance; one which its more recent response to The Spear suggests has only become stronger with time.

The ANC’s intolerant attitude to tolerance

By: Gareth van Onselen
Follow @GvanOnselen
Follow @insidepols
4 June 2012

Of the many issues The Spear has brought to the forefront of public debate, strangely, tolerance has not been one of them. But it goes to the heart of the whole affair. Tolerance demands people accept the right of others to express those opinions with which they do not agree. Not necessarily to accept the view itself, merely one’s right to express it. Without that any society is reduced quickly to some sort of autocratic regime, with one officially sanctioned view and anything else, well, treasonous.

And I use the word treasonous deliberately because it is evoked on a fairly regular basis by members of the ANC to describe any view that might contradict its own. South Africa does not have the death penalty but in many country’s they do and ‘treason’ is one of a very few crimes punishable by death, so any accusation of it should not be taken for granted.

In order to illustrate my point, I thought a trip to the archives might prove interesting. Specifically, a 2005 speech delivered in the National Assembly by then-DA MP Ryan Coetzee, during no less than a debate on tolerance itself. At the very least it is helpful in order to remember this attitude has been well entrenched for some time.

A week earlier, ANC zealot and good friend of anti-democratic rhetoric, Fetjie Mentor, had accused the DA of being ‘treasonous’. She was required to withdraw her comment, which she did, but that didn’t stop her, in the middle of a debate on tolerance, from making the same remark again. Once again she was asked to withdraw the remark. But this time she refused, choosing instead to walk out.

And so, a debate on tolerance, held in the epicentre of democratic debate in South Africa – the National Assembly – was brought to a bitterly ironic and depressingly intolerant close. The whole incident is a powerful metaphor for tolerance and the ANC’s approach to it. One played out more recently and on a far grander scale through the ANC’s response to The Spear.

One could make a strong case that the ANC’s intolerance does not extend merely to criticism of it but to opposition itself. That many members of the ANC regard the very idea of opposition to it as illegitimate. Something which would explain its repeated reference to the Western Cape as a ‘state within a state’ and Jacob Zuma’s various religious suggestions that God demands “We should not allow anyone to govern our city (Cape Town) when we are ruling the country”.

There is much to be written about the ANC’s attitude to tolerance. It loves the idea when it comes to demanding others show due deference to its own anti-democratic suggestions, but has little time for it when it comes to accepting criticism or any idea with which it diagrees.

Below is a short transcript of Ryan’s speech and the ANC’s response to it. Judge for yourselves.

Debate in the National Assembly
16 November 2005

DEBATE ON INTERNATIONAL DAY OF TOLERANCE: TOLERANCE AS KEY TO BUILDING A CARING SOCIETY

Mr R. COETZEE:

Thank you, Chairperson, in response to the previous speaker, the question isn’t whether South Africa is more tolerant than it was under apartheid, the question is whether South Africa today is more tolerant than it was 10 years ago under President Mandela. [Interjections.] The answer is “No”. The second question is: Are we more tolerant today than we will be in 10 years time? And I fear that the answer to that question is “yes”.

Tolerance is one of those values originally associated with liberalism and consequently also with liberal democracy. [Interjections.] To which lip service is routinely and almost universally paid. But like many liberal values, which have gained a general acceptance, there is very often a stark divergence between theory and practice. That is because tolerance is easy most of the time, because most of the time the views and practices of others do not offend or threaten, but the value of tolerance cannot simply be measured when others are easy to tolerate, but rather when they are hard to stomach. And when are they hard to stomach? When they offend, when they insult and above all when they threaten to deprive us of our position and our power.

In the same way a commitment to democracy is not proven when you win elections, but rather when you lose them. Which is one reason why the ANC’s commitment to democracy is not yet a given. One of the most persistent themes in Martin Meredith’s latest book The State of Africa, is the quite complete lack of any real acceptance or attachment of tolerance in Africa since independence. The intolerance of descent and difference in postcolonial Africa is perhaps best exemplified by the Liberian Charles Taylor’s astonishing and quite unforgettable election slogan “I killed your Ma, I killed your Pa, but you will vote for me”. He won.

What about our country? Some of the most intolerant behaviour in South Africa takes place right here in the National Assembly. No lesser somebody than the Chairperson of the ANC’s caucus has stood at this very podium and accused the leader of the opposition of treason, because his analysis differs from hers. [Interjection.] Sorry, on a point of order, Chairperson, somebody said they still accuse the leader of the opposition . . .

THE CHIEF WHIP OF THE LARGEST MINORITY PARTY:

On a point of order, Chairperson, the hon Mrs Mentor has just said she still accuses the leader of the opposition of treason.